The Department of Housing and Urban Development’s formula for the disparate impact test is really a three-part inquiry: at phase one the claimant must show that a certain practice possesses “discriminatory impact.” At phase two, the lending company may justify its methods simply because they advance some “substantial, legitimate, nondiscriminatory interest.” At stage three, the claimant may override that reason by showing the genuine ends of “the challenged practice might be served by another training which has a less discriminatory impact.”
Despite the fact that proof discriminatory intent isn’t necessary, claimants nevertheless bear a difficult burden at phase one in showing with advanced analytical analysis demonstrable undesireable effects and recognition associated with the exact training causing these impacts. (more…)